|
Tuesday, March 07, 2006
Gov't to high court: Suits v. proclamation moot
MANILA -- On the eve of oral arguments on Proclamation 1017, state lawyers asked the Supreme Court (SC) Monday to dismiss for being moot the seven consolidated petitions against President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's state of national emergency order.
Solicitor General Alfredo Benipayo denied the allegations of petitioners Professor Randy David, Alternative Law Groups (ALG), Daily Tribune publisher Niñez Cacho-Olivares, former senator Loren Legarda, Kilusang Mayo Uno (KMU), opposition congressmen led by House Minority Leader Francis Escudero, and the Integrated Bar of the Philippines that Proclamation 1017 violated Constitutional provisions, particularly those governing the Bill of Rights.
Benipayo said the SC has lost its authority to resolve the petitions following Arroyo's lifting of the proclamation on March 3, exactly a week after the order was declared.
"The issues thus raised against the validity of the proclamation of a state of emergency under Proclamation 1017 have been rendered moot and academic. Consequently, there is no more actual controversy upon which judicial review may be exercised in the cases at bar. To be sure, the courts have no more authority to pass upon issues of Constitutionality solely for academic exercise or advisory opinion," he said.
Benipayo also cited the SC decision in the case Sanlakas versus Executive Secretary assailing the Constitutionality of President Arroyo's declaration of a state of rebellion during the July 27, 2003 failed Oakwood mutiny.
In that case, Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban wrote a separate opinion stating that "as a rule, courts have no authority to pass upon issues through advisory opinions or friendly suits between parties without real adverse interests. Neither do the courts sit to adjudicate academic questions -- no matter how intellectually challenging -- because without a justifiable controversy, an adjudication would be of no practical use or value."
Benipayo further said Proclamation 1017 was just a declaration of a fact that leftist and rightist groups, together with anti-Arroyo groups, have joined forces to topple the government.
"Verily, if it were not for such managerial prudence, the Philippine peso would have already fallen to an all-time low, again -- but the reverse happened," he said.
Benipayo denied allegations that the proclamation was in fact a "de facto Martial Law", saying that the decree did not attempt to curtail freedoms of the people.
"It simply called on the Armed Forces to restore order and avert a brewing rebellion, which it did, and rightly so," he said.
Benipayo said the declaration of state of national emergency was necessary owing to the series of events that happened over the past months, referring to the January 17 escape of four Magdalo Group soldiers who were facing rebellion charges for the foiled Oakwood mutiny and the purported "Operation Plan: Hackle", a code name of the plot to grab power on the occasion of the Philippine Military Academy (PMA) alumni homecoming in Baguio City.
This was further exacerbated by the planting of a bomb at the PMA parade ground on the occasion of the PMA alumni homecoming last February 19.
These were followed by the recapture of fugitive mutineer First Lieutenant Lawrence San Juan in an identified communist safe house in Batangas where documents and materials showing the alliance of Magdalo Group soldiers and the communist group were found.
Benipayo also told the court that on February 23, National Police Chief Arturo Lomibao intercepted information that members of the police's Special Action Force were planning to defect but that the police chief managed to convince the policemen to remain with the chain of command.
Part of the move to topple the government was the alleged meeting at the residence of former congressman Jose "Peping" Cojuangco attended by businessmen and mid-level government officials, he said.
The plot allegedly involved former Army's elite Scout Rangers commander Brigadier General Danilo Lim and other Marine officers. The military officials were planning to join the February 24 anniversary celebration of Edsa and declare their withdrawal to the chain of command.
"In the wake of this chain of disturbing events, the President issued Proclamation 1017 declaring a state of national emergency and calling out the Armed Forces of the Philippines to prevent or suppress lawless violence and rebellion," Benipayo said.
The SC has issued guidelines for Tuesday's oral arguments. It gave each petitioner seven minutes to argue on specific grounds while respondents were given 25 minutes to defend the allegations.
The lawyer of petitioner David will discuss why he said in his petition that Proclamation 1017 is void on its face, and void as applied to his alleged illegal arrest and the revocation of all permits to rally.
Former senator Rene Saguisag, who will argue on behalf of Olivares, will discuss why Proclamation 1017 is void when applied to the alleged illegal raid and ransacking of Tribune offices without warrant and if the edict justified the alleged military and police presence in media establishments.
Escudero and the KMU will discuss why they said in their petition that Proclamation 1017 allegedly usurped and impaired legislative powers and for being a subterfuge for a declaration of Martial Law, and if it validated the alleged illegal arrest of five party-list representatives.
The IBP was asked to discuss if the SC may review the factual bases of Proclamation 1017 and under what standards.
The SC also ordered ALG to argue why Proclamation 1017 is void for alleged usurpation of power of the state to authorize a state of national emergency under Section 17 of Article XII of the Constitution and for its alleged lack of publication.
Legarda's lawyer was asked to discuss why Proclamation 1017 violated her right to prosecute her election protest.
It also ordered the respondent government to discuss new issues that it raised in its comment, specifically why the seven petitions should be dismissed on the ground of that these were moot and to explain if petitioners ALG, IBP, KMU, Escudero, and Legarda have no legal standing in filing the case. (ECV/Sunnex)
(March 7, 2006 issue)
Write letter to the editor. Click here.
Join the Sun.Star message board. Click here. |
|
|
|
[return to top]
[home]
|
|
Gang arrested inside Mactan-Cebu airport